The Philip DeFranco Show - PDS 08.26 Why People Are Freaking Out About Alix Earle, Surgeon Lets 13-Year-Old Drill Hole in Patient’s Skull

Episode Date: August 27, 2024

Head to http://www.lumen.me/DEFRANCO for 15% off your purchase. Go to http://getsuperbeets.com and use code DEFRANCO to get a free 30 day supply of SuperBeets Heart Chews on all bundles and 15% off your first order! New Limited Drop @ https://BeautifulBastard.com & everything is 25-50% OFF for now! 70 Days Until Election Day! Make Sure You Are Registered to VOTE: https://Vote.org  – ✩ TODAY’S STORIES ✩ – 00:00 - Austrian Surgeon Allegedly Let Teen Daughter Drill Hole in Patient’s Head 2:30 - Alix Earle Apologizes For Racist Language, Rolling Stone Unveils Creator List 6:14 - Arizona Town Slammed After Woman Was Arrested at City Council Meeting 8:42 - Zuckerberg Says Biden Admin “Pressured” Meta to Censor Covid-19 Content 11:06 - Sponsored by Lumen 12:02 - New Bill Would Compensate People Who Donate Kidneys to Someone on Waitlist  16:04 - DOJ Asked to Investigate Paxton’s Raid on Latino Democrats’ Homes  19:50 - A Growing Number of Police Departments Are Using AI to Write Crime Reports 23:03 - Sponsored by Human N 24:10 - Elon Musk’s Mars Plans Could Come at the Cost of Earth’s Climate ——————————   Produced by: Cory Ray Edited by: James Girardier, Maxwell Enright, Julie Goldberg, Christian Meeks, Matthew Henry Art Department: William Crespo Writing/Research: Philip DeFranco, Brian Espinoza, Lili Stenn, Maddie Crichton, Chris Tolve, Star Pralle, Jared Paolino Associate Producer on Travel to Mars: Jared Paolino ———————————— #DeFranco #MrBeast #Pokimane ———————————— Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Sup, you beautiful bastards. Welcome back to the Philip DeFranco Show, your daily dive into the news. And if I'm being honest, probably the most consistent thing in your life. I mean, really the only thing that's guaranteed in life these days are death, taxes, and my stupid face

yapping to yours at six Eastern, three Pacific, Monday to Thursday. The rest is just pure chaos. But with that said, we got a lot of chaos to talk about today. So let's just jump into it. This is a news show. You ever think about how like when you go under

for surgery or any procedure, like you have no idea what the doctors might be doing to your body. And I know that comes off paranoid and I'm not gonna fight those allegations. I am at the heart of all things, a paranoid skeptical person. And you know, sometimes you see things that are simple, but enormous like amputating the wrong leg,

removing the wrong organ or operating on the wrong foot. Though other times it's more deliberate, like when a surgeon used a laser to burn his initials into a woman's transplanted liver, or just even this creep who routinely peered under the surgical covers and gawked at patients' genitals while they were asleep, or this plastic surgeon who posted an Instagram photo

of a trans patient's removed penis, which he molded into a heart for Valentine's Day. Yes, I really just said that, and yes, that really happened. But also now, as it turns out, every once in a while, you have to worry about not just what's gonna happen, but who's doing it. Which is exactly the case I wanna talk about today,

because there was this 33-year-old man in Austria who suffered serious head injuries during a forestry accident back in January, with him then getting flown to a university hospital for an emergency surgery, you know, the kind of thing you don't wanna fuck around with at all. And according to reports,

I don't know if it was bring your kid to work day. The surgeon allegedly let their 13 year old daughter take part in the operation and not just like be in the room. They even let this little girl drill a hole in the man's head. Now, luckily the procedure seems to have gone off without a hitch, but that's not the point. Random ass teenagers shouldn't be drilling holes

in people's heads. What also makes this even more outrageous is how long it took for anyone to even find out about this, including the patient. Like I said, this happened back in January, but the public prosecutor only received an anonymous complaint in April. After which time the patient says he first heard

about the case through the media, but was only told by police that he was the victim in July. You know, now what we're seeing is the entire surgical team under investigation and the surgeon as well as another employee, they've reportedly been fired. And in their place, the hospital has actually offered a job to the 13 year old girl who's still considering

whether to accept or negotiate better benefits. I'm joking, I'm not. I know everything else in this story is so outrageous that was maybe believable for a second, but no. So yeah, I guess the main thing is the next time you go in for a medical procedure, apparently it is not a stupid question to ask if your surgeon is actually going to be a small child.

Just a little, you know, double check. And then in internet drama news, let's talk about this Alex Earl situation, who if you don't know is this massive influencer, has nearly 4 million followers on Instagram, over 7 million on TikTok. And she's kind of, not to be too dismissive, she's kind of just famous for being very attractive

and doing rich people shit. So of course that also means that she has a podcast. But the reason that she's in the news right now is that she's getting a ton of heat for racist comments that she made in the past. You see, for the last two years or so, screenshots have surfaced showing her using the N-word on Ask.fm in the summer of 2014.

But they're using it multiple times while responding to questions on the platform. And while these screenshots have existed for a while, they really only started getting a ton of attention in the last two weeks. People then flooding her comment sections, asking her to address the posts. You also had some even accusing her of trademarking

and copywriting those posts to prevent them from being shared further. A claim that reportedly started on the Do We Know Them podcast with the host claiming that they were contacted by Alex's lawyers. But then all of that leading to yesterday where Alex apologized and addressed all of this

on her Instagram story, writing, I am taking accountability and want to make it clear that I was 13 years old and did not understand the deeply offensive meaning behind that word. That is no excuse for using that word in any context or at any age. That absolutely is not the way I speak or what I stand for. Then adding, I am deeply sorry that my words have hurt many and have led people to believe that I have any prejudice in my heart. I promise you that could not be further from the truth. And also saying that she regrets how she handled this situation and thinks that it was wrong to stay silent

and ignore the controversy for so long. Saying there that she was just unsure of what to do and this is the advice that she was given, though she now only blames herself for not speaking out faster. And then in addition to that, she addressed the trademark claims saying, in the absence of my addressing this,

my silence allowed others to fill the void with rumors that simply aren't true. One rumor in particular is that I tried to trademark my old post, which is absolutely ridiculous and untrue. So as far as, you know, if this apology is working, you know, it seems to be for some, but others less so. And with that, here's the only thing that I'll say, right? Because this is not a situation

where this is an apology for me to accept or not. I don't know if you can tell. But all I ask since we're dealing with the court of public opinion is that you remain consistent, right? If Alex Earl is one of your faves and you're like, this was 10 years ago, she was a child, we should forgive. Awesome, that is your personal position. I hope that you maintain that same energy when it deals with someone that you do not like. And same for the other side. If you

look at Alex Earl and you're like, fuck her. Just because she was 13 and it was 10 years ago, that's no excuse. I hope you have that same energy when something like this happens with one of your faves. Just be consistent or at least have that same energy. And I also say that understanding not every situation is the same, right? Some people have more obviously changed from who they were in the past than others. So you can never really know who a person is or what they really are because you're not them.

So that's all I'll say on that note. But notably, this is not the only reason Alex Earle was in the headlines lately. Because Rolling Stone just published a list of the most influential creators of 2024, and Alex was at the number eight spot. In that article, you know, it didn't dive into this controversy,

but notably she also wasn't the only person dealing with some backlash on the list. Because at number three, you had Mr. Beast with Rolling Stone loosely touching on the variety of allegations that he's currently facing, saying people debate the ethics and authenticity of his high production charitable feats, his all-encompassing platform,

the impact he's had on his North Carolina hometown, and the working conditions on his shoots, which are currently under scrutiny. But his spot oning platform, the impact he's had on his North Carolina hometown and the working conditions on his shoots, which are currently under scrutiny. But his spot on the list, it primarily focused on his historic subscriber count and his philanthropic content. And as you'd expect, there were a ton of other big names on the list.

Hasan Piker, Jake Shane, Keith Lee, Pokimane, Naura Smith, all making the list. And at the top spot, you had Kai, Sinet, and then Rhett and Ling taking home silver. As far as how Rolling Stone determined this list, the outlet said it kind of had to overall consider what power on the internet even is, explaining, "'We had to grapple with a highly subjective question.

"'What does it mean to have influence?' "'It's not just about who's getting sponsorships. "'It's about having people look up to you, "'follow and comment on your posts, "'engage with and share your content, "'and truly care what you have to say for better or worse.'" And with that saying that they asked creators from fashion to food to, to nominate their favorites

and also reviewed data from Creator IQ. But you know, with all that said, I gotta ask, what are your thoughts here? Whether it be the Rolling Stone list or Alex specifically. And then, now this clip out of Arizona has drawn a ton of outrage online. So let's walk through it, right? So you have this mother named Rebecca Massey

who is speaking during public comments at a surprise city council meeting. But they're specifically criticizing the salary of the city attorney. Mayor Skip Hall then interrupts her to tell her that she was violating a rule that prevents her from using her time at the podium to lodge complaints

about city employees, and all of that leading to this interaction. That's all fine, well, and good, but that's a violation of my first amendment rights. So that's, well, this is your warning, okay? Warning for what? Warning for attacking the city attorney personally um this is all factual information it doesn't matter you're violating my first amendment rights i could get

up here and i could swear at you for three straight minutes and it is protected speech no you have the supreme court it is no you can't why don't you look at case law no you can't i can so if you want to be also the chair is engaged do you want to be escorted out of here do you want to be escorted out you're violating do you want to be escorted out of here? You're violating my First Amendment rights. You are violating my First Amendment rights. That's your opinion. Right.

And Rebecca then acknowledges that, yes, she did sign on to a forum with the rules, but she said that the rules, they weren't constitutional. And then you had Mayor Hall ordering her off the floor. Chief, could you have somebody come down here and escort Ms. Masiak? Really? Is that necessary? Yes, I think it is. In front of my 10-year-old daughter, you're going to escort me out for expressing my First Amendment rights? She can go with you.

She can go with you. I'm not leaving. Well. Can you just leave that with me? Um, I'm, no. I'm expressing my first, do not touch me. And so she continues to resist as an officer cuffs her and removes her. She's trying to tell him not to touch her

and asks what charges she's being detained for. He then forces her out and she leaves the frame of the video. Now with this, reports say that she was cited for criminal trespassing. And of course, we've seen that clip garner a ton of backlash. But tons of people saying that

and saying that America is becoming a fascist state and claiming that the rule she was accused of violating shouldn't exist as it violates free speech. And others adding, the most power hungry people in the world are in your local governments. Don't really care what her political opinions are. We shouldn't be arresting citizens for criticizing government officials. End of story. You even had the mayor-elect of Surprise issuing a statement condemning the situation, writing, as Americans, our right to free speech is fundamental, especially

when it comes to holding our government accountable. What happened to Rebecca Massey is unacceptable. No citizen should ever be arrested for voicing their concerns, especially in a form specifically designed for public input. And now some even expect legal action to be taken with the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression sharing the video of the arrest in writing.

City of Surprise, we'll see you in court. And so for now, we'll have to see where this goes. If a lawsuit gets filed, then what comes from it? And then we just got a bombshell or a nothing burger. Those are the two main reactions we've seen so far. Rick has met his CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, just sent a letter to the House Judiciary Committee Chairman, Jim Jordan, in response to the committee's investigation into content moderation on online platforms. And in his letter, Zuckerberg aired a number of grievances and touched on several controversies. But really, the thing that's been grabbing headlines is when he said that senior officials

from the Biden administration, quote, repeatedly pressured our teams for months to censor certain COVID-19 content, including humor and satire, and expressed a lot of frustration with our teams when we didn't agree. And you have outlets like Axios noting that Zuckerberg said in September of 2020 that Facebook wouldn't treat Antivax posts as misinformation, a policy that changed just a few months later in February of 2021. And in fact, by August of 2021, Meta said that it removed more than 20 million pieces of content on Facebook and Instagram for violating COVID misinformation policies. But Zuckerberg's letter went beyond

just detailing this pressure from the White House. He condemned it, saying, "'We made some choices that, with the benefit of hindsight "'and new information, we wouldn't make today,' and adding, "'I believe the government pressure was wrong, "'and I regret that we were not more outspoken about it. "'I feel strongly that we should not compromise our content standards due to

pressure from any administration in either direction and we're ready to push back if something like this happens again. With Zuckerberg then going on to say that he regretted hiding cons and related to the New York Post coverage on Hunter Biden ahead of the 2020 election. But you know, the FBI said may have been rooted in a Russian disinformation operation and Zuckerberg added, it's since been made clear that the reporting was not Russian disinformation, and in retrospect, we shouldn't have demoted the story. With a matting there, the meta has since changed its policies and processes

to ensure that that situation doesn't happen again. So now with this, we've seen Republicans on the committee celebrating this letter, calling it a, quote, big win for free speech. But then on the other side, you have the White House holding their ground and defending their approach to COVID misinformation,

saying in a statement, when confronted with a deadly pandemic, this administration encouraged responsible actions to protect public health and safety. Our position has been clear and consistent. We believe tech companies and other private actors should take into account the effects their actions have on the American people while making independent choices

about the information they present. Right, and it's the last part of that last sentence that has some saying, this is a nothing burger. With people claiming that this is Zuckerberg just trying to shield himself and throw someone else under the bus. Because it's places like the Washington Post wrote, Zuckerberg also said,

Meta's content moderation actions were its own and not the result of government compulsion. A characterization consistent with the Supreme Court's ruling that the plaintiffs failed to show a direct connection between government pressure and the removal of their posts. Or with Zuckerberg even writing, we own our decision. But you know, with all that said,

I gotta pass the question off to you. What are your thoughts here? And then, did you know that your metabolism is at the center of everything your body does? Optimal metabolic health translates to a bunch of benefits, including improved energy levels, better fitness results, better sleep, easier weight management, and more. And thanks to our sponsor, Lumen, you just breathe into this device first thing in the morning, and you'll know what's going on with your metabolism, whether you're mostly burning fats or carbs. And then get this, Lumen gives you recommendations for a personalized nutrition plan to improve your metabolic health. You can breathe into it before and after workouts and meals to know exactly what's happening in your body in real time. And Lumen gives you tips to

keep you on top of your health game. And personally, you know, I've used it before hikes or runs to see if my energy level needed a boost with a quick banana or something. You know, no kidding. You know, sometimes I need it, sometimes I don't. And especially as now I'm training for my first half marathon, like it's great having Lumen in my back pocket. So if you wanna take the next step in improving your energy and health,

go to lumen.me slash DeFranco to get 15% off your Lumen. That's L-U-M-E-N dot me slash DeFranco for 15% off your purchase. And thank you Lumen for sponsoring today's show. And then should people get money for donating a kidney to a stranger? And I ask that not as some hypothetical, moralistic question, but because right now there's a bipartisan bill in Congress that would do exactly that. It's called the End Kidney Deaths Act. It would offer a refundable tax credit of $10,000

a year over five years for a total of $50,000 to people who donate a kidney to a stranger on the National Kidney Waitlist. And that would be absolutely massive for so many people because according to the National Kidney Foundation, there are over 100,000 Americans currently waiting for a kidney. But because of the ongoing kidney shortage, there are only around 17,000 people a year that receive a kidney.

And this is thousands are removed from the list every month, either because they died or they just became too sick for a transplant. In fact, according to a press release announcing this legislation, 100,000 people died while waiting for a kidney between 2010 and 2021. Over the last 15 years, 50% of the people waiting

have died before getting a kidney. And notably, for the last two plus decades, there has been no increase in the number of living donors, which is largely hovered around 6,000 a year. Because the vast majority of kidney transplants, roughly two in every three, they actually come from an organ donor who died. And notably, of those 6,000 living donors,

most are giving it to a family member or a friend. In fact, only around 300 to 400 living donor kidneys a year come from strangers giving to an anonymous recipient on the wait list, which is why experts say that by creating a financial incentive, thousands more will step forward every year to donate a kidney to someone on the list. With the Congress members who introduced the bill saying

that if enacted, the proposal is expected to save up to 100,000 Americans currently on the wait list. But also notably, they say that this won't just save lives. With the lawmakers claiming this legislation would actually save an estimated 10 to $37 billion in taxpayer funds, right? And that's because Medicare picks up the tab for most patients with kidney failure,

and that includes dialysis, which if you don't know is the main course of treatment for people who need a new kidney to live. And the key thing there is that in addition to just it being a miserable experience for the person, it's also insanely expensive, costing Medicare more than $50 billion each year. So increasing the number of kidney recipients

would actually result in major savings, especially because kidney transplants from living donors, those can last up to 20 years, which is nearly twice as long as those from deceased donors. Now with all that said, on the other side of this, you have opponents of the End Kidney Deaths Act saying, hey, this is essentially amounting to letting people sell their organs,

which has questionable moral implications and could create a slippery slope. With Alexander Capron, a professor emeritus of healthcare law, policy, and ethics at the University of Southern California saying, I think the act would not increase organ availability. When something goes from being something which people give to being something that is bought,

the givers stop giving. With this, going on to say that he's also worried that this program could undercut global efforts to stop illicit organ trade. Adding, I think it would be irresponsible of us to ignore the spillover effect. If the United States allowed payments, the countries where people are trying very hard

and succeeding very well in stopping illicit organ trade, the Philippines, Pakistan, India, Turkey, would have a much harder time getting their governments to take this seriously. But there, we've seen others pushing back on this, like Luke Semerow, a bioethicist at Bloomsburg University of Pennsylvania, who argues that these kinds of arguments,

they're just a distraction to take away from legitimate debate. Explaining, nobody thinks we should adopt a system like kidney sales in India, China, or Iran. None of those systems have been remotely similar to what advocates of the present legislation are arguing for. And adding with this, that he thinks the act would significantly increase the number of available kidneys.

And noting there that there have been polls showing a majority of Americans support regulated compensation for donors, while also arguing that the current system isn't working. Saying we've asked people to provide kidneys for free. We've done that for decades and it has not worked. Right, and to that point, we've also seen people taking it even further. Arguing that people should have a right to sell organs if they want, and a regulated organ market would actually save many lives. But you know, with all that, I'll leave you with two things. The first is my opinion here, and understand it is probably the most biased opinion I'll ever have on a story.

Because if you don't know, I have a kidney disease, and I'm going to need a transplant in the future at some point. And while I can't speak to the greater organ market, I do think that you should be allowed to get compensated for donating a kidney or even pay someone to give you a kidney. There would, of course, need to be regulations and safeguards in place to avoid heavy, heavy exploitation. And I don't know, I think that's the key thing is I would love to see someone

that is giving the gift of life to be compensated. But two, that said, whether you agree or you disagree with my opinion, I'd love to know your thoughts in those comments down below. And then these recent raids in Texas that we're seeing launched by the office of the state's attorney general, Ken Paxton, have been called Gestapo style.

But let's break it down so you can decide for yourself, right? So last week, Ken Paxton's office conducted a series of raids on homes across three different counties, which he says is a part of his two-year investigation into alleged election fraud and vote harvesting. And according to a statement from Paxton, his office is, quote, sufficient evidence to confiscate laptops,

"'cell phones, and documents.'" Which you know is exactly what happened in these raids. It hit several prominent figures in small communities, including a local mayor, a city council member, and a Democratic candidate for the state legislature. And notably, several of those targeted were members of the League of United Latin American Citizens, or LULAC, which is the oldest Latino civil rights

organization in the country, with one of those members being Lydia Martinez, an 87 year old woman living in San Antonio, who has been a part of LULAC for over three decades. And there she has long worked to expand voter registration to seniors and veterans in South Texas. And according to Martinez, a group of nine armed men and women knocked on her door early last Tuesday

with a search warrant in hand. She then asked to change out of her nightgown, but was instead told to just sit in the dining area where she answered questions while the agents rummaged through her house for four hours. What they then reportedly made to stand outside for another half hour still in her nightgown while the agents searched her dining area. With Martinez saying, They searched everything. My underwear, my razzias, my nightgowns, everything. They went into my garage, they opened up my car, they went through my whole car, my whole garage, my refrigerator, my kitchen, cabinets, everything.

And adding, it was horrible, Gestapo style. I thought we lived in a free country, not Russia. With the agents then reportedly carrying off her appointment book, cell phone, laptop, blank voter registration cards, and her certification for completing a voter registration course. And so now with all this, LULAC has sent a letter to the Department of Justice asking them

to investigate Paxton's office for Voting Rights Act violations. With their president and CEO together writing in the letter, we believe that his conduct constitutes a direct attempt to suppress the Latino vote through intimidation and harassment in violation of the Voting Rights Act and other federal civil rights laws. And in a news conference outside of Paxton's office

yesterday, LULAC leadership condemned the raids and laid into Paxton, saying, you don't go after our grandmothers, you don't go after our great grandmothers, and you don't go after them because they are just trying don't go after our great grandmothers, and you don't go after them because they are just trying to vote. And LULAC's Texas State Director adding, it is disgraceful and outrageous

that the state of Texas and its highest ranking law enforcement officer is once again using the power of his office to instill fear in the hearts of community members who volunteer their time to promote civic engagement. And adding, I have been contacted by elderly residents who are confused and frightened, wondering why they have been singled out.

Attorney General Paxton's actions clearly aim to suppress the Latino vote through intimidation and any means necessary to tilt the electoral process in favor of his political allies. You know, with this, it is worth noting that this is not the first time that Paxton has been accused of employing intimidation tactics, which is also something Lulac pointed out in their letter to the DOJ. Earlier this year, for example, he set his sights on an El Paso nonprofit that helps migrants, accusing them of facilitating illegal entry into the US, human smuggling and harboring aliens. And there we saw a judge in that case having to step in and force him to stop, with the judge saying that he was trying to, quote,

"'Run roughshod on the nonprofit without regard to due process or fair play.'" But for now, with all this, we're gonna have to wait to see what happens, right? There haven't been any charges pressed as a result of the raids. And the DOJ has reportedly said that they are aware of this matter,

but they didn't comment. So where I'll leave this is if you are in Texas or really any of the United States, go to vote.org to register to vote and or make sure you are registered to vote. As happens every election cycle, there are a ton of people that come election day, they find out, oh, turns out I got kicked off the voter rolls

or I wasn't registered the right way. I mean, even in Texas specifically here, Governor Abbott said on Monday that a million people were kicked off of the voter rolls. And unfortunately, every year there's no shortage of stories of people that say they should not have been kicked off. So just double check. And while you're there, you can even set reminders for yourself, see what other things specifically you're going to vote for. Because remember, it's not just a national election. There's a lot of local stuff. And while there's a lot of people, some even in the government that want to make it very hard for people to vote, there are a lot of services out there like vote.org that make it much easier to follow through. And then pretty much every job

field out there right now is at the very least dabbling with or fully embracing AI right now. And something that we're starting to see all over the country is that a growing number of police departments have started using AI chatbots to write the first draft of their crime reports. And doing so by analyzing audio captured on their body cameras during the incident in question. Many of the officers who have tried this new experiment totally thrilled with all the time that it saved them. Well, right now, there are a few different systems out there. One of the main products being used is one that's built with the same technology as ChatGPT and sold by the company Axon, which may sound familiar because, of course, they're famous for developing the Taser and being a main US supplier of body

cameras. And although Axon won't say how many police departments are using this technology, experts and police officials say that they expect AI generated reports to become even more common in the coming months and years. Especially because the company has such deep relationships with so many departments that buy its Tasers and body cameras. With Rick Smith, the company's founder and CEO,

even telling the Associated Press that the tool has had the most positive reaction of any product the company has introduced. With him adding, they become police officers because they want to do police work and spending half their day doing data entry is just a tedious part of the job that they hate. But with this, he also noted

that there are certainly concerns with generating reports using AI and that it should just be seen as a first draft. Arguing that a district attorney prosecuting a criminal case would want to be certain that officers, not just a chat bot, are responsible for writing incident reports because they might need to testify in court

about what they witnessed. But notably there, there's basically no way to ensure that because there are almost no safeguards in place. And then even the few that do exist, they're piecemeal and they vary from department to department, right? I mean, for example, the Oklahoma City Police Department only lets their officers generate their reports

using AI for minor incidents that don't lead to arrests. But notably, that's not the case for plenty of other police departments like those in Lafayette, Indiana and Fort Collins, Colorado, where officers are allowed to use Axon's AI product to generate any report they'd like. And so as a result, you have many prosecutors, legal experts, and other advocates raising concerns about AI chatbots being used to generate such important documents that play a key role in determining who gets prosecuted or imprisoned. Especially because those police reports are sometimes the only testimony a judge actually sees, especially for misdemeanor crimes.

And so we're seeing things like a community activist in Oklahoma City calling the tool deeply troubling. And they are specifically pointing to the widespread, longstanding concerns about racial bias in AI and arguing. The fact that the technology is being used by the same company that provides tasers to the department is alarming enough. And adding that automating reports will, quote, "'ease the police's ability to harass, surveil,

"'and inflict violence on community members.' While making the cops' job easier, it makes black and brown people's lives harder." We also saw legal scholar Andrew Ferguson noting that while human-generated police reports do have flaws, it's unclear if AI is more reliable. Saying there that in general, there needs to be more public discussion

about the potential benefits and harms of these products before police just go out there and they start using them widely without really telling anyone. Specifically, pointing to the fact that the large language models behind AI chatbots are inclined to just make up false information called a hallucination in the AI world.

Meaning that these chatbots could just easily add falsehoods that are convincing and hard to notice in the police reports that they generate. With Ferguson also adding, "'I am concerned that automation and the ease of the technology would cause police officers to be sort of less careful with their writing. And beyond all the specifics here, this also just renews a much broader debate about the growing use of various AI technologies in policing and the host of privacy and civil rights concerns that it raises. Which is why with

all this, I got to ask you, what do you make of all this? And then, so let's keep it simple. The better your blood flows, the better you are, right? Makes sense. And heart disease is way more common than you may think. And doing all we can to sustain a healthy heart should be a high priority. And thanks to today's sponsor, Super Beats Heart Chews, they have science backing them up. You know, paired with a healthy lifestyle,

the antioxidants in Super Beats are clinically shown to be nearly two times more effective at promoting normal blood pressure than a healthy lifestyle alone. Taking just two tasty chews a day can give you daily blood pressure support while promoting heart health energy without the stimulants. So, you know, without the crash.

You know, there's no pills to swallow, no ingredients to mix or prepare, and no artificial sweeteners or colors. And Super Beats is the number one doctor, pharmacist, and cardiologist recommended beet brand for cardiovascular health support. And they have over 80,000 five-star reviews. And mean super beat shoes they really do taste good and they make it easier for me to confidently maintain heart health matters especially since they're small you know i

can take them on the go for travel or whatever and it just couldn't be easier so double your potential with super beats heart shoes and get a free 30-day supply of super beats heart shoes on all bundles and 15 off your first order by going to getsuperbeats.com and use code DeFranco. That's getsuperbeats.com, code DeFranco. And then in 20 years, 1 million people will be living on Mars. That is at least according to Elon Musk. But also like, here's the thing,

whether that's a pipe dream or a possible reality, that may not matter because the consequences could very well be the same. And that's because launching rockets at anything like the scale that would be required to fulfill Musk's vision or even just attempt it, that could mean altering our atmosphere and affecting our planet in ways

that we still don't fully understand. And so ultimately the effort to make sure humans have a new place to live in case something happens to Earth, it could actually be the thing that makes the Earth a worse place to live in. So I'm saying that means that Musk's mission to Mars, it may just be bringing us closer to the future that it claims to be protecting us from.

But with all that, right, the first thing that you should know is that while Musk is in the headlines for a lot of reasons, the thing that seems to drive him more than anything is making humanity a multi-planetary species. In fact, he's actually publicly claimed that he only accumulates assets, including a controversial $47 billion Tesla pay package

this year to fund his plans for Mars. In fact, he has straight up testified to that in court. And you know, this whole idea, it goes back to when he was 10 years old and he read Isaac Asimov's 1951 science fiction novel, Foundation. That's a book about a man who travels to a far away planet to try and preserve human knowledge and civilization

from the fall of an interstellar empire. And it's also a book that Musk talks about all the time. With him telling Rolling Stone in 2017, the lesson I drew from that is you should try to take the set of actions that are likely to prolong civilization, minimize the probability of a dark age try to take the set of actions that are likely to prolong civilization, minimize the probability of a dark age, and reduce the length of a dark age if there is one. With him then going on to say things like, there's high urgency to making life multi-planetary. We've got to do it while civilization is so strong. And whatever your feelings about him, and I have some, he has seemingly pursued

this goal with remarkable consistency. In fact, that mission has actually driven nearly every business venture he's undertaken on Earth. And I'm not just talking about SpaceX. I mean, take Twitter, for example. In fact, that mission has actually driven nearly every business venture he's undertaken on earth. And I'm not just talking about SpaceX. I mean, take Twitter, for example. Musk reportedly told people that he bought the platform to help test how a citizen-led government that rules by consensus might work on Mars. And then there's the Boring Company.

Right, that's a Musk company that provides tunnel construction services here on earth. But apparently it was really started, at least in part, to develop equipment to drill under Mars' surface. In fact, they even sell Tunnel Mars t-shirts online. And Tesla? Musk has said that he envisions people on the planet will drive a version of the company's

steel-paneled cyber trucks. And there's also the possibility that Tesla-built solar panels are what Musk intends to use to heat homes and create energy on Mars, at least according to people familiar with his plans. And then also, you know, going back to SpaceX, it's not just the rockets.

The company has reportedly partnered with a plant-based alternative meat company, not only to provide food in its cafeterias, but also to test the products as a possible protein source for Mars. But of course also, yes, the rockets are the big thing. With that, SpaceX's Starship, right, the spacecraft meant to ferry astronauts to the moon and Mars, it recently survived a re-entry into Earth's atmosphere for the first time. And all of this as Musk has significantly moved up his timeline for settling Mars. With it being just this year that he started making that claim about 1 million people living on Mars in 20 years. Whereas, you know, in the past he said it would take 40 to 100 years started making that claim about one million people living on Mars in 20 years.

Whereas, you know, in the past, he said it would take 40 to 100 years to have a self-sustaining civilization on the planet. And notably there, that 20 year target, it's roughly the same timeline NASA has set for what it's called the audacious goal of just getting anyone there at all. And with all that, of course,

there are massive questions about whether or not Musk is just full of shit. With even his own employees expressing their doubts about his timeline, with some even suggesting that it was about competing with fellow space savvy billionaire Jeff Bezos. But either way, there is a reason to believe that he is serious. Because this year he has reportedly started asking SpaceX employees to start thinking more concretely about the specific details of a future Martian city.

There is one team coming up with plans for small dome habitats, including the materials that could be used to build them. Then another is working on spacesuits to deal with Mars' unforgiving environment. There's a medical team researching whether humans can have children there. And Musk himself has even allegedly volunteered his sperm to help seed a colony, which yes, it does sound like the most Elon Musk thing, but also I should say that Musk has denied that.

But in any case, right? The point of all that is to say that Musk's mind seems to be made up with him having decided he is willing to do whatever it's going to take. While he believes that it will benefit the human race, it's also all of humanity that may have to bear the cost of his decision if he's wrong. Because on the surface, the amount of greenhouse gas emissions from space flight, it's pretty negligible.

You know, the percentage of fossil fuels burned by the space industry, it's only about 1% of that burned by conventional aviation. And then even there, aviation only makes up around 2% of overall global emissions. But notably, the deeper truth is more complicated. And that's because emissions from space flight are in some ways more harmful than an equivalent amount

of emission from some other sector. And with that, scientists from spaceflight are in some ways more harmful than an equivalent amount of emission from some other sector. And with that, scientists are especially worried about soot released from rockets collecting in the lower layer of the middle atmosphere, or the layer called the stratosphere. Notably, it's home to the ozone layer, or the thing shielding us

from the sun's harmful ultraviolet radiation. And it is extremely sensitive. I mean, if you're old enough, you might even remember being told that you are destroying the ozone layer by using hairspray. Look at the size of that aerosol abomination. I've got to stop it before it depletes the ozone layer and everyone gets a nasty sunburn. Which, by the way, it did not just magically change. Thankfully, there was this little treaty called the Montreal Protocol that successfully set limits on chemicals known

to harm the ozone layer, like those that used to be found in hairspray that aren't there anymore, with all that being a fantastic example of the world coming together to deal with an atmospheric emergency. But in any case, right, the Montreal Protocol, unfortunately, did not address rocket emissions or satellites. And the impacts from the soot that I mentioned, it's potentially massive. In fact, in a paper published in 2022,

soot from rockets was shown to be nearly 500 times as efficient at heating the atmosphere as soot released from sources like airplanes closer to the surface. So with that, we have Eloise Marais, one of the authors of the paper, telling the New York Times, "'That means that as we start to grow the space industry

and launch more rockets, we are going to start seeing that effect magnify very quickly.'" And actually to that point, another study published in 2022 found that if the rate of rocket launches increased by just a factor of 10, their emissions could cause temperatures

in parts of the stratosphere to rise as much as two degrees Celsius. And that is a level of warming that could begin to degrade the ozone over most of North America, all of Europe, and a big chunk of Asia. And to be clear with that, the idea that the rate of rocket launches

could increase by a factor of 10, it's not all that far-fetched. If anything, it could actually be a conservative prediction. I mean, in just the past few years, for example, the number of rocket launches has spiked as commercial companies and government agencies have launched thousands of satellites into low-Earth orbit. And notably there, SpaceX is leading the way.

With the company in 2023, launching nearly a hundred rockets on its own. And in 2024, it's reportedly aiming to launch nearly 150. And with that right now, those launches are mostly to build the company's Starlink satellite constellation, which you know is basically supposed to provide high speed internet to the entire world.

But of course, notably like most things SpaceX does, it's also about getting ready for life on Mars. With Musk actually saying that the key to funding his Mars vision being the Starlink satellite project. And then beyond that, SpaceX is one funding from NASA to look into adapting its Starlink satellites

for use in a Martian communication network. And a big key thing with that is that many satellites have a lifetime of five to 15 years. So with that, you'll have to replace these satellites, meaning more rockets, more emissions, more soot in the atmosphere. And then also with that, the satellites themselves

are also a potential source of ozone depleting pollution. With the study lies here saying the metal from defunct satellites reentering the atmosphere could quote, induce changes in the stratospheric aerosol layer. But with that specifically, I should also say the ultimate effects of those metals, it's still not known. In either way, but especially in the case of SpaceX, sending satellites into orbit is just one of the reasons

that the number of rocket launches is expected to keep going up. Because you have SpaceX developing Starship, which is a nearly 400 foot reusable rocket for the NASA moon mission. But importantly, it also might be the model of rocket who eventually send residents to Mars. With people familiar with the plan saying future versions

of the rocket could have a living space in its nose, several floors of living quarters, and even amenities like a running track and a movie theater. And there Starship may carry a hundred passengers at a time to Mars, and that journey would happen about every two years. Musk also reportedly telling SpaceX employees that he'd use Starship as a sort of Noah's Ark

carrying plants and animals on the initial voyage. And then, of course, the way we started this whole thing is with the fact that Musk apparently plans to put a million people on Mars by the middle of the 20th century, right? And even if that is, yes, a long shot, if you got even a fraction of that many people into space, it would mean a massive increase in the number of launches,

especially if you then factor in all the test runs that need to happen as well. And in fact, just in July, SpaceX started pushing to sharply increase Starship launches in the coming years. And specifically there, it proposed a launch up to 25 times annually from its complex in Texas. So under a plan approved by the government in 2022,

it only has permission to conduct up to five orbital flights there every year. And then also, notably, apart from enabling humankind to colonize Mars and possibly as another way of funding this mission, SpaceX has also proposed Starship as a way of intercontinental travel that could shorten the duration of the longest journeys on Earth to less than half an hour. And so with that, you have Andrew Wilson, an assistant professor in environmental management at a university in Scotland, telling Space.com, the amount of pollution that would cause in comparison to aircraft is orders of magnitude of a difference. And also saying there, we are in a climate crisis.

We already saw warming that is close to the targets of the Paris Agreement. And here we go, creating a massive launcher, which is going to just add more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. Though also hitting on that point, I should also mention there have been efforts on SpaceX's part to reduce the emissions

from these launches. Most rockets use kerosene fuel, but notably SpaceX's Starship uses a mix of liquid methane and liquid oxygen propellants. And one day it could even be powered by liquid hydrogen. But still there, at the end of the day, we are a long way from having totally green space trap. Methane is a greenhouse gas up to 90 times more potent

in trapping heat in the atmosphere than carbon dioxide. And then even if they were propelled by liquid hydrogen, that would produce water vapor, and that's a greenhouse gas too. And ultimately any hydrocarbon fuel produces some amount of soot, with one scientist telling the Times, "'There is no such thing as a totally neutral propellant.

They all have different impacts.'" And then also, of course, with that, a full understanding of the environmental impact would have to account for the greenhouse gases generated by the manufacturing of Starship vehicles. But that's also an even tougher number to pin down. Although something else to consider are the local impacts of SpaceX launches.

Like in June, for example, a Starship blast off burned seven and a half million pounds of fuel and sent chunks of metal and insulation flying to one side of a state park and also igniting a small fire. And in fact, SpaceX operations have reportedly caused fires, leaks, explosions, or other problems at this facility in Texas at least 19 times since 2019.

But the company also allegedly conducting tests without the proper permits and going ahead with launches despite being told not to do so by the FAA and otherwise violating agreements with local authorities. But with all that said, I gotta pass the question off to you. What are your thoughts with all this? And if possible, try to give me your opinion

without thinking about Musk's politics or your feelings outside of this situation. But that, my friends, is the end of your Tuesday evening, Wednesday morning dive into the news. And I can already tell we're gonna have a big show tomorrow. So I just wanna say, I love yo faces, and I'll see you then.